[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH][4.17] EFI: don't convert memory marked for runtime use to ordinary RAM
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 16:28:20 +0200
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=citrix.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=citrix.com; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=xwhTf2lz/q61mjjxjbo1LO93Bx7bYXQd6Hzs+E5lv/o=; b=NtyyJHlBr5NKSupaoRaYrD2678NL9RJtsn7ZHudC40PcndmXo4yXOGgRmgo02yjUUdEyE1qXcQnB6PK1G2IA8Srm/MzytUxw0hWxYZ+nx+t2SaVcK8p0NTFe1AH+dyi9KtUjyyOFPM2nEARyCN6I9VlW61TABP2VSHRRD+RUcowcrEUMOPiilzPj7f8QPSxUyAgME5YpT6SZHqiFPznbBnSkBrrx4RSo66A+6dAE6SXidejtYe7QFBDHn2jVM9Wy65ovzYTLYw5/l1RDYyXW5DHknWtp1cP61JQOQBvEp24l2EDVaDhBTRTBUSKZKjG4pt9t6LIfrY68DyHhR8Z4JA==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=GLoqPYdS9HvAqttfBdixfa/FGkRKO4GohRKI4hPA+sKCe0IhqqLJiSIrhCubsiSX7EgduTxC9JZNBjl++IgHxADM1IeY1KJMa/WhwS/oBnGx9/LLxaUNtaNt+RdNUutrZ/46+lYCxisgT3qxTTb1881zjtKgjNikVkToA33DAwx7Qbs5cSzfPH1rX4e009JLxKSd2feSk5DbpE4BjaswufLx/FckuxNlqBsf1uRmoVI5lQqB0t6APqZG1lYNRMpiOkoye9HhpijELgAcrZi0jQRhTDOEgHxdxINoC3WtzKfrQGpzkaFdpLhGjDETxvOst7ZtrJMd1YHD1EoRO2eyiA==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=citrix.com;
- Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Volodymyr Babchuk <volodymyr_babchuk@xxxxxxxx>, Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx>, Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@xxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:28:39 +0000
- Ironport-data: A9a23:TDaCMaIF9JurQFdOFE+RRJQlxSXFcZb7ZxGr2PjKsXjdYENSgzVVy TcYXziPP6yPYGGmKIx1a9m19htUvZ/Xx4U2TQFlqX01Q3x08seUXt7xwmUcnc+xBpaaEB84t ZV2hv3odp1coqr0/0/1WlTZhSAgk/vOHtIQMcacUghpXwhoVSw9vhxqnu89k+ZAjMOwRgiAo rsemeWGULOe82MyYzl8B56r8ks15qyj42tA5DTSWNgQ1LPgvyhNZH4gDfnZw0vQGuF8AuO8T uDf+7C1lkuxE8AFU47Nfh7TKyXmc5aKVeS8oiM+t5uK23CukhcawKcjXMfwXG8M49m/c3Kd/ /0W3XC4YV9B0qQhA43xWTEAe811FfUuFLMqvRFTGCFcpqHLWyKE/hlgMK05Fb9J071tB1hqz qQRczcqbSm4l/i60YvuH4GAhux7RCXqFKU2nyg5iB38U7MhS52FRLjW79hF2jt2ntpJAfvVe 8seb3xocQjEZBpMfFwQDfrSns/x3iW5L2Ie9Q3T/PVui4TQ5FUZPLzFKt3ad8bMXcxItk2Zu njH7yLyBRRy2Nm3mWPaqi7117ancSXTSI1LF6/i5vpRvVCtlmohLgY7flCwmKzs4qK5c5cFQ 6AOwQIsp6Uv8E2gTvHmQga15nWDu3Y0S9dWVuE39gyJ4q7V+BqCQHgJSCZbb94rv9NwQiYlv neWm/v5CDopt6eaIVqf67OVoDWaKSUTa2gYakcsVhAZ6tPupIUyiBPnTdt5FqOxyNrvFlnY3 TeOqyQvgqQJusQC3a674FPvjiqlo97CSQtdzg/aRH6/5wV1IousfZW16EPz5OxFao2eSzGpn HUCgdnY0+kIArmEjinLS+IIdIxF/N6AOTzYxFJqQZ8o8m30/2b5JN8JpjZjOE1uL8AIPyfzZ 1Pesh9Q45kVO2a2aahwYMS6DMFCIbXcKOkJn8v8NrJmCqWdvifclM2yTSZ8B1zQrXU=
- Ironport-hdrordr: A9a23:q8VeZK+nROn2tnuLlPtuk+E9db1zdoMgy1knxilNoENuH/Bwxv rFoB1E73TJYVYqN03IV+rwXZVoZUmsjaKdgLNhRItKOTOLhILGFuFfBOfZsl7d8mjFh5VgPM RbAtRD4b/LfD9HZK/BiWHXcurIguP3lpxA7d2uskuFJjsaD52IgT0JaDpyRSZNNXN77NcCZe 2hz/sCgwDlVWUcb8y9CHVAd+/fp+fTnJajRRIdHRYo5CSHkDvtsdfBYlGl9yZbdwkK7aYp8G DDnQC8zqK/s8ujwhuZ82PI9ZxZlPbo19MGLs2Rjco+LCnql2+TFfJccozHmApwjPCk6V4snt WJixA8P/5r43eURW2xqQuF4XiT7B8er1vZjXOIi3rqpsL0ABggDdBauI5fehzFr2I9odBVys twri+knqsSKSmFsDX25tDOWR0vvFGzu2AenekaiGEaeZcCaYVWsZcU8CpuYd099RrBmc8a+d RVfY/hDK48SyLaU5mZhBgl/DWUZAV+Iv/cKXJy+vB80FBt7QNEJgUjtY8id0w7heMAoql/lp v525tT5c9zp+8tHNdA7bQ6ML+KI12IZy7wG0SvBnmiPJ07Ghv22u7KCfMOlamXRKA=
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 09:50:40AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> efi_init_memory() in both relevant places is treating EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME
> higher priority than the type of the range. To avoid accessing memory at
> runtime which was re-used for other purposes, make
> efi_arch_process_memory_map() follow suit. While on x86 in theory the
> same would apply to EfiACPIReclaimMemory, we don't actually "reclaim"
> E820_ACPI memory there and hence that type's handling can be left alone.
What about dom0? Should it be translated to E820_RESERVED so that
dom0 doesn't try to use it either? I guess using E820_RESERVED
could also confuse dom0 about ACPI data placement.
Thanks, Roger.
|
